'AI-generated images': Hyderabad court restrains media outlets, YouTubers from misusing Chiranjeevi’s name

Hyderabad: Hyderabad City Civil Court has restrained multiple media outlets, YouTube channels, apparel brands, and other commercial entities from using names, images, voice, or titles associated with Telugu cinema icon and former minister K. Chiranjeevi without authorization.

The interim injunction was recently issued by Chief Judge S. Sadidhar Reddy, who held that the unauthorized use of Chiranjeevi’s persona or attributes could cause irreparable damage to his reputation, harm that “cannot be compensated monetarily.”

Court acknowledges Actor’s National Fame

The court recognized Chiranjeevi as one of the most prominent and identifiable figures in Indian cinema, observing that his fame and reputation were integral to his personality.

“He is one of the most recognisable faces in the Telugu as well as Southern Film Industry, and is well-known across India,” the court noted.

Drawing parallels with previous judicial precedents, the judge referred to Delhi High Court rulings on the personality rights of actors Jackie Shroff, Anil Kapoor, and Abhishek Bachchan, and the Madras High Court’s order in favour of Rajinikanth.

Titles and Attributes form part of persona

The court emphasized that names and titles such as “Mega Star,” “Boss,” “Annayya,” “Chiru,” and “Mega Star Chiru”, along with the actor’s image, voice, and likeness, constitute unique attributes of his personality.

These identifiers, the court observed, are instantly associated with Chiranjeevi and have become a part of his public identity. Any use of such elements, especially when linked to negative or misleading content, could misrepresent or malign the actor’s image, the judge said.

AI-generated images and commercial exploitation

In his plea, the actor alleged that several entities were using his film stills, photographs, and popular titles on T-shirts, posters, and online merchandise without consent.

The court was also informed that AI-generated and morphed images and videos featuring Chiranjeevi’s likeness were being circulated on social media and commercial platforms, some portraying him in objectionable or misleading contexts.

The judge warned that such misuse could extend beyond commercial exploitation to include political, anti-national, or pornographic purposes, resulting in severe reputational harm.

‘Notice dispensed owing to Social Media Speed’

Given the viral nature of digital content, the court said that issuing notices to all parties in advance would render the order ineffective.

“Considering the large number of defendants and the speed at which images and videos can be propagated on social media, ordering notice would make the petition infructuous,” the court remarked.

Accordingly, notice was dispensed with for defendants 1 to 33 and 36, and an ad-interim injunction was granted restraining them from using Chiranjeevi’s identity in any manner.

Government departments excluded for now

However, the court cited Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, in stating that no ad-interim order can be issued against government entities, namely, the Union Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology and the Department of Telecommunications (defendants 34 and 35), without prior notice.

Next hearing on October 27

Issuing notices to all parties, the court directed that defendants refrain from using or misappropriating Chiranjeevi’s name, image, voice, or any personality attributes for direct or indirect gain. The matter has been listed for further hearing on October 27.